Asad Ali Toor

“For instance, journalist Asad Ali Toor tweeted about alleged corruption by a former army officer and then-government official, saying “I read whatever I see with an open mind and would also request you in this country nobody is holy cow & must not be above the law, I’m journalist with bias for democracy/constitution/rule of law. If our all other segments of society are answerable/accountable why not Asim Bajwa?”. 41 Soon thereafter, a private person filed an FIR alleging that “[i]n the last few days, Mr. Toor has used derogatory language and negative propaganda for high -level government institutions, including the Pakistan Army through his social media posts which is a grave crime according to t he law.”42”

报告把记者身份、相关推文和私人投诉联系起来；投诉指控不是已证实犯罪。

“Ultimately, Mr. Toor moved to quash the FIR before the Lahore High Court. He explained that the FIR did not “disclose[] any particulars of the Twitter account or internet device through which the complainant accessed the allegedly defamatory tweets. He has not, for instance, mentioned whether he saw the allegedly defamatory tweets on his laptop or on his android? . . . The absence of such information which would establish the link between the Complainant and allegedly defamatory tweets strongly suggests that the Complainant is not the aggrieved person, he is only acting as a proxy.”45”

Toor 向拉合尔高等法院申请撤销 FIR，质疑投诉者与相关推文的关联。

“The case was ultimately closed by investigators (the investigators told the Lahore High Court that “no evidence has been collected against the petitioner revealing the commission of any offense”46).”

报告记载调查机关以未搜集到犯罪证据结案；不是法院无罪判决，也未证明诉讼单独造成结案。

“Then, after he publicly asser ted that the authorities may have been behind the attack, a second private person lodged a fresh complaint against him.48 As Mr. Toor explained, “a private citizen got up and went for the report to the FIA. He claimed that I had conspired against the orga nizations, the Army, and the ISI and had accused them.”49 In this case, the FIA’s notice to appear specifically alleged “defamation of institution of Government of Pakistan through social media.” 50 This notice too , did not specify the allegedly offending speech, with the notice simply saying that “you are well aware of the facts/circumstances of the said inquiry.”51”

最初结案后另有私人投诉及含糊传唤；不能视为同一次程序。

“The proceedings initiated by these notices were not pursued by the FIA after the notices were challenged in court – further suggesting that the case had not been an effort to vindicate the rights of a ‘natural person’ but rather in response to his criticism of the government.”

报告记载传唤被法院挑战后 FIA 未继续推进；末尾动机判断属于报告分析，不是法院事实认定。

“Section 20 should be reformed. In the event Section 20 is not reformed or repealed, the government should concede it is unconstitutional. Further, the FIA should implement the Islamabad High Court’s order in the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists case to report on FIA abuses, which would also provide a basis for further action by bodies in Pakistan considering PECA’s Section 20.”

作者提出制度改革和报告 FIA 滥用情况的建议；未记录该建议已执行或带来个案结果。